July
1994
The Satya Interview:
Vegetarian Candidate Ken Baer
|
|
|
Ken Baer is a vegetarian and environmental
activist. He is also running for the State Assembly in the 52nd Assembly
District, which comprises Brooklyn Heights, Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill,
Carroll Gardens, Bay Ridge, and a few blocks in Park Slope. The current
assemblyperson, Eileen Dugan, has been in office for fourteen years.
Q. What are your environmental ideas?
A. I’m very concerned about solid waste. First of all, it’s
imperative we eliminate incineration as a legal option for disposing
of garbage. Second of all, and maybe more importantly, we should reduce
the amount of solid waste which needs disposing. That means passing
the Environmentally Sound Packaging Act, which would mandate that packaging
be reusable or recyclable.
We need to rethink everything we do and how we package things. People
are in the habit of using plastic forks and containers and going to
take-out places and taking plastic plates and glasses. There’s
a whole set of bad habits that all need to change and if that means
taxing and prohibiting then we need to do it. The fate of the Earth
is in the balance.
Q. What incentives would you use?
A. I think most companies could use ceramic plates and metal cutlery.
I would choose or sponsor legislation that would give the full cost
of these items as a tax credit against taxes against due the state.
Q. What about the issues of incineration and landfills?
A. I’m against incineration, but the people of Staten Island have
been dumped on long enough and I would like the City and State of New
York to have reached a position where we don’t need a landfill.
That sounds very pie-in-the-sky, very idealistic. But that’s what
we need to aim for. It’s not fair to the people of Staten Island;
it’s not fair to those folks out of State who are willing to take
it and landfill our garbage for a price. It shouldn’t be put in
anyone’s backyard. We should think of the Earth as a whole. One
piece of it is no less precious than another.
Q. What about the Gowanus Canal and its pollution?
A. I know there are discussions now about oxygenating the water and
creating a flow through the Gowanus that isn’t currently occuring.
The Gowanus is stagnant water. I think oxygenation will improve the
aroma in the area. Any industries or commerce and tourist attractions
that can be developed in the area would be fabulous. People don’t
expect much to happen in the area, so whatever can be developed is
great.
Q. What about the City’s recent decision to scale back
on the number of times it will be collecting recyclable material?
A. As much as I would like to see recycling be as frequent as possible,
the focus should be on the amount of recycled material collected. That
is the most important thing: the proportion of what is being recycled.
Many of us used to trip over to Atlantic Avenue to recycle; when we
eventually got mobile units we were very happy. So, when we had curbside
pick-up it was like a luxury, and people need to get used to a different
frequency. I know in larger buildings with smaller apartments it’s
a little more difficult to accumulate recyclables for longer periods
of time. Larger buildings may have to be done more frequently, and
taken
care of as special circumstances. Collections of regular garbage could
be reduced in number to save money.
Q. When did you become a vegetarian?
A. I became a vegetarian in 1972. It related a lot to the Vietnam War
and the killing going on over there. It got me thinking about animals
and how I related to them and how they met their end because I wanted
to feed myself on them. I tried to become a vegetarian in early 1971
and I wasn’t successful; eventually I lived with people who knew
a lot about healthy foods and the next time I tried it I was. I’m
a lacto-ovo-vegetarian; although I don’t eat that much dairy.
I’d like to see animals treated more humanely, and I am very
much opposed to the injecting of hormones into dairy herds.
Q. Do you feel that milk created using rBGH [artificial Bovine
Growth Hormone] should be labeled?
A. Most definitely.
Q. I’d like to press you more on your linking of the
Vietnam War with your vegetarianism.
A. Well; with all war, there’s death. And no-one likes to think
they’re responsible for another entity’s demise. Being so
acutely aware of what was going on in Vietnam, and the role of our government
- to the degree I didn’t want to participate in the War - made
me reflect on my eating habits and how I related to animals at large.
And it was for those reasons I became a vegetarian.
Q. Was vegetarianism instrumental in your political consciousness?
A. No. I don’t proselytize or make a big deal of my vegetarianism.
It’s just another facet of me, and it just so happens that I
am a politician and I am a vegetarian. I am, however, a person of conviction.
My concern for all living things and the environment has led me to
organize
people. My convictions make me to want to take action. I have found
in my campaign that vegetarians have been working hard for me, and
environmentalists
are beginning to come on board.
My vegetarianism mainly centers on the quality of food that’s
available on the market. I try to eat as many organic fruits and vegetables
as possible. There is a good reason for that: I don’t like to
see the food I eat contaminated with chemicals and fertilizers. I don’t
think it’s beneficial to the Earth, and I don’t want to
consume those things. So, I come from that perspective personally and
I think that translates to something I am interested in politically:
how healthy the food supply is. Another facet of this is the water
supply:
and the potential for it to be contaminated - or to the extent to which
it is contaminated already - by virtue of industrial pollution, agricultural
pollution etc. As a society and a world we need to protect our water
supply. Without a safe water supply, the human race will die.
Q. Do you think there are justifiable political and human health
reasons to give special breaks to businesses that are promoting healthy
food and cutting down on waste?
A. I think that consideration should be given in terms of tax benefits
to businesses that are involved with improving their environmental
habit
and I think it makes good policy sense in terms of redirecting where
society’s going. It’ll benefit those businesses and they
need to be rewarded for being socially responsible.
Q. What about businesses that are not being socially responsible?
Should we penalize them or tax them?
A. I think that may be a halfway step towards alleviating the problems.
But I think broader approaches should be taken for those businesses
that operate in an environmentally sound way. It’s not just taxing
fertilizers or chemicals used on food - it is banning them, and finding
justifiable scientific evidence to do it.
Q. I realize it’s out of your immediate jurisdiction,
but I’d like your opnion on the carriage horse situation. Two
have died in one month of unknown causes, both on Manhattan streets.
That they’re there at all is because of the law passed by the
City Council earlier this year allowing drivers to take horses into
mid-town away from the Park during the day and into the night. Should
this law be repealed?
A. The horses need to be treated humanely, and that when there are conditions
the horses find difficult, they should be accommodated. The horses need
to enjoy their lives. I realize people are getting a livelihood from
these horses, but the horses need to be treated well. I would repeal
the law.
Q. There is shortly going to be a bill sponsored by Councilmember
Freed mandating the spaying or neutering of companion cats and dogs
in order to cut down on the thousands stray cats and dogs overpopulating
our streets. What is your position on that?
A. I support the Spay/Neuter Bill. I know Kathryn Freed very well;
any bill she has proposed has been given a lot of thought and study
and
I’m sure it’s a bill that should be enacted.
Q. Do you feel vegetarianism should be actively promoted in
schools?
A. I think we should learn about general benefits and detractions of
all foods. Kids should be learning it’s not good to take in a
high fat content and by virtue of that you’re promoting vegetarianism.
It’s a less ideologically-based argument.
Q. Why remove vegetarianism from ideology?
A. I think there’s worth in vegetarianism strictly from an objective
point of view, in its health benefits. There are lots of people who
don’t want to feel imposed upon by virtue of someone else’s
philosophy. But if you can present an idea with a different slant, it
will be more appealing than simply proselytizing or trying to impose
your philosophy on other people. I think just presenting people with
the facts will enable them to make their own decisions. And that’s
the main reason why Americans’ eating habits have changed over
the last twenty, twenty-five years.
Q. I think a lot of vegetarians feel there is still so much
hostility to their ideas.
A. I don’t think so. People do evolve, and I don’t think
we’re that way anymore. The more people learn the wiser the decisions
they will make. People should be discouraged from eating meat, not
for
philosophical reasons but from what happens to the earth when trees
are felled. Tremendous amounts of energy and water go into the production
of a pound of beef, and less so going into the same amount of grain
and other vegetables.
Q. Perhaps there needs to be something more than discouragement.
A. I’m not so sure. If fish were not diminishing in numbers the
way they are: if there were sufficient numbers and flourishing species
and there were nothing environmentally unsound about eating fish, I
would be reluctant to pass any legislation that would prohibit people
from eating fish. It seems to me that is a personal issue. We do, however,
need to put the environment before all else. Protecting the Earth and
the resources located in the earth. The water, the land, the air: we
all need these things to exist.
 |
|
|
 |
